DebRD_ATL said:Bayesian meta-analysis perspective on the trial evidence: traditional frequentist meta-analyses report point estimates and confidence intervals.
That is right for the common case. Whether it is right for the case being asked about depends on a detail that has not been given.
Admin said:Propensity score matching studies and the trial evidence: when RCTs aren't available for a specific question, propensity score-matched observational…
Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.
DebRD_ATL said:Bayesian meta-analysis perspective on the trial evidence: traditional frequentist meta-analyses report point estimates and confidence intervals.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. I would resist the confidence. Half of what this board was certain about two years ago has since been quietly dropped, and nobody went back to correct the threads.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsThe figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.